IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0252130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A cost-effectiveness analysis of iStent inject combined with phacoemulsification cataract surgery in patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma in France

Author

Listed:
  • Kaspar Nieland
  • Antoine Labbé
  • Cedric Schweitzer
  • Gaetan Gicquel
  • Joris Kleintjens
  • Amrita Ostawal
  • Maarten Treur
  • Heather Falvey

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of implementing iStent inject trabecular bypass stent (TBS) in conjunction with cataract surgery (Cat Sx) in patients with mild-to-moderate glaucoma from a societal perspective in France. The secondary objective was to explore the economic impact of iStent inject TBS in patients who comply to different degrees with their anti-glaucoma medications. Methods: A previously published Markov model was adapted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with iStent inject TBS + Cat Sx versus Cat Sx alone over a lifetime time horizon in patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma in France. Progression was modeled by health states reflecting increasing stages of vision loss. Disease progression was obtained from the two-year randomized clinical trial assessing safety and effectiveness of both interventions. French specific health-state utilities and costs were obtained through a targeted literature review. Model structure and inputs were validated by French ophthalmologists. Outcomes were expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The robustness of results was tested through sensitivity analyses. Results: iStent inject TBS + Cat Sx reduced the number of medications needed and risk of blindness. Incremental cost and QALYs were €75 and 0.065 leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €1,154/QALY gained. ICER ranged from dominating for non-persistent patients to €31,127 patients fully persistent with their medication regime. Results from one-way sensitivity analysis had a maximum ICER of €29,000 when varying input parameters. iStent inject TBS + Cat Sx had an 86% chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion: Results demonstrate that iStent inject TBS + Cat Sx is a cost-effective intervention for intraocular pressure reduction when compared to Cat Sx alone in France.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaspar Nieland & Antoine Labbé & Cedric Schweitzer & Gaetan Gicquel & Joris Kleintjens & Amrita Ostawal & Maarten Treur & Heather Falvey, 2021. "A cost-effectiveness analysis of iStent inject combined with phacoemulsification cataract surgery in patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma in France," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-12, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252130
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252130
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252130&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0252130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252130. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.